do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
LIFEnews : the latest news from the EU LIFE Programme. January 2014.
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment
Subjects: EU programme, conservation of resources, environmental policy, environmental protection, serial publication

Link to pdf page version here

January 2014

A new lease of LIFE

As one LIFE programme period ends

LIFE moves closer to
environmental policy

and another begins, LIFEnews speaks

The biggest achievement of the LIFE

to Angelo Salsi, Head of the LIFE

Environment Unit in 2013 was bringing

Nature Unit, about the programme's

the programme closer to policy,

achievements to date and his

according to the Unit's head Hervé

expectations for the future.

Martin. He believes this is also true for

the 2007-2013 period as a whole.

Read more >>

Read more >>

FORTHCOMING EVENTS

31/01

26/02

Platform meeting on the link between
research and innovation

Pisa, Italy

Transport sustainability online tool
workshop

27-28/03

ADAPTtoCLIMATE Conference calls for
papers

Bilbao, Spain

Athens, Greece

01-03/04

Green Carbon Conference

Brussels, Belgium

14-16/05

Nature protection in Hungarian military
areas

Veszprém,
Hungary

View other events >>

  ANNOUNCEMENTS
09 January New LIFE
Regulation published:
programme continues to 2020

10 January Invasive species
project recognised for social
innovation

13 January LIFE project brings
experts together at
International Wolf Congress

14 January LIFE helps bring
about allis shad breeding
return to the Rhine

17 January New publication
out! Long-term impact and
sustainability of LIFE Nature

20 January Precursor study to
new LIFE project reveals why
migratory birds fly in V-
formation

21 January New publication
out! LIFE and Soil protection

24 January MHyBus project
demonstrates advantages of
new fuel source for public
transport

27 January Top 5 LIFEnews
stories of 2013

View other announcements
>>

KEEP IN TOUCH

No need to surf to get
informed about LIFE.
Subscribe here.

Follow us on Facebook: Click
here.

Follow us on Twitter: Click
here.

Follow us on Flickr: Click
here.

KH-AX-14-010-EN-N
ISSN: 1725-1877

About this e-mail
LIFEnews is issued every month by the LIFE Unit of the European Commission's Directorate General for the Environment. The content of the newsletter does not
necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions of the European Union. Visit the LIFE programme website at: http://ec.europa.eu/life 
Subscription
To subscribe and unsubscribe to LIFEnews, please go to the EUROPA  mailing lists 
© European Union, 2013 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged
Case T-143/14: Action brought on 3 March 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of a yellowy pattern)
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2014135EN.01005701.xml










5.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/57






Action brought on 3 March 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of a yellowy pattern)
(Case T-143/14)
(2014/C 135/74)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 27 November 2013 given in Case R 703/2013-2.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The figurative trade mark representing a device of a yellowy pattern for goods and services in Classes 7, 9, 16, 25, 35-39, 41, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 11 388 311
         

Decision of the Examiner: Found the mark applied for not eligible for registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) CTMR.
Case T-144/14: Action brought on 3 March 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of an ivory dotted pattern)
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, telecommunications industry, trade-mark law








C_2014135EN.01005702.xml










5.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 135/57






Action brought on 3 March 2014 — EE v OHIM (Device of an ivory dotted pattern)
(Case T-144/14)
(2014/C 135/75)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: EE Ltd (Hatfield, United Kingdom) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 7 January 2014 given in Case R 705/2013-1.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Community trade mark concerned: The figurative trade mark representing a device of an ivory pattern for goods and services in Classes 7, 9, 16, 25, 35-39, 41, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 11 388 493
         

Decision of the Examiner: Found the mark applied for not eligible for registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) CTMR.
Final Report of the Hearing Officer — Power Exchanges (AT.39952)
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: electrical energy, fine, infringement of EU law, inter-company agreement, market-sharing agreement, restriction on competition, spot market, trading operation








C_2014334EN.01000401.xml










25.9.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 334/4





Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Power Exchanges
(AT.39952)
(2014/C 334/05)
On 22 March 2013, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (2) against the spot power exchanges EPEX Spot (‘EPEX’) and Nord Pool Spot AS (‘NPS’) (together ‘the parties’).
Following settlement discussions and settlement submissions in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (3), the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections (‘SO’) on 11 December 2013, addressed to EPEX and NPS, stating that they had participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and of Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. The SO alleged that the parties had engaged in a non-competition arrangement which included an allocation of territories, with the object of restricting competition between them, in connection with their spot electricity trading services.
In their replies to the SO, both EPEX and NPS confirmed that the SO reflected the content of their settlement submissions.
Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision addressed to EPEX and NPS deals only with objections in respect of which the parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views, and I have come to a positive conclusion.
In view of the above, I consider that the effective exercise of their procedural rights in this case has been respected.

Brussels, 3 March 2014.

Wouter WILS




(1)  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29) (Decision 2011/695/EU).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18).
Case T-145/14: Action brought on 3 March 2014 — adidas v OHIM — Shoe Branding Europe (Device of two parallel stripes)
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, registered trade mark, sports equipment, textile industry, trade-mark law








C_2014129EN.01003501.xml










28.4.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 129/35






Action brought on 3 March 2014 — adidas v OHIM — Shoe Branding Europe (Device of two parallel stripes)
(Case T-145/14)
(2014/C 129/42)
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: adidas (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Shoe Branding Europe BVBA (Oudenaarde, Belgium)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 November 2013 given in Case R 1208/2012-2;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Community trade mark concerned: The mark (‘other type of mark’) for footwear in Class 25 — Community trade mark application No 8 398 141
         

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registrations Nos 3 517 646, 3 517 612, 3 517 588, 3 517 661, 4 269 072, 6 081 889; German trade mark registrations Nos 944 624, 944 623, 399 50 559, 897 134; International trade mark registration No 391 692 for goods in Classes 18, 25 and 28; and non-registered mark/sign used in the course of trade in Germany

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(4) CTMR.
Case T-166/14: Action brought on 3 March 2014 — PRS Mediterranean v OHIM — Reynolds Presto Products (NEOWEB)
Date: 2014-03-03
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, building industry, registered trade mark, soil improvement, trade-mark law








C_2014142EN.01004501.xml










12.5.2014   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 142/45





Action brought on 3 March 2014 — PRS Mediterranean v OHIM — Reynolds Presto Products (NEOWEB)
(Case T-166/14)
2014/C 142/58
Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties


Applicant: PRS Mediterranean Ltd (Tel Aviv, Israel) (represented by: A. Späth and V. Töbelmann, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Reynolds Presto Products, Inc. (Richmond, United States)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 November 2013 given in Joined Cases R 889/2012-2 and R 635/2012-2;










—


Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments


Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘NEOWEB’ for goods in Class 19 — Community trade mark application No 6 184 568

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Various national trademarks of the word mark ‘GEOWEB’ for goods in Classes 1, 17 and 19 and the non-registered mark ‘GEOWEB’ used in the course of trade in all Member States of the European Union

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially upheld the opposition

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal proceedings

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b), 8(3), 8(4) and 8(5) CTMR.